www.elsblog.org - Bringing Data and Methods to Our Legal Madness

05 October 2006

Great Moments in the History of Ignorance & Division III

I started with Frank Goodnow’s 1904 presidential address at
the first annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. Today’s
Great Moment comes from Charles Grove Haines’ 1940 presidential address at the APSA’s 35th
annual meeting. Haines was one of Goodnow’s students, and like
Goodnow, one of the great public law scholars. See Glendon Schubert, The Future of Public Law, 34 Geo.
Wash.L. Rev. 593, 603 (1965-1966). In this excerpt, Haines describes the growing
divide between law and political science:

In the early years, when political science was becoming a
separate and independent field among the social sciences, public law, a subject
at this time accorded little attention in the curricula of law schools, was for
many of the members of the new organization one of the major lines of interest.
Gradually the scope of work coming within the ambit of the American Political
Science Association has been broadened and enriched by the exploration,
analysis, and interpretation of other phases of political ideas and phenomena,
with the result that political science may truly be regarded as no longer under
the bondage of the lawyers. On the other hand, public law has now become one of
the important subjects of instruction in law school curricula, and with this
trend has come a decline of the importance of this field of instruction in
departments of political science. In fact, the pendulum has swung so far in the
opposite direction that there are some who maintain that the only deserving
place for public law courses in which the case method of instruction is used is
in the law schools. In my opinion, such views are incompatible with the best
interests of legal instruction both in the law schools and in departments of
political science. Public law always has been and continues to be primarily
public in its nature, significance, and implications. It belongs, therefore, as
much to the field of the political and social sciences as it does to the field
of the law, and political and social scientists as well as lawyers may well
cooperate in the consideration and evaluation of the vital problems involved in
its development.

Tomorrow’s Final and Really Great Moment: Glendon Schubert describes legal
research as “primitive,” explains why political scientists started ignoring
their public law colleagues, and calls the study of public law in law schools “ghastly.”